Intellectual property
A Handbook on the WTO TRIPS Agreement
This handbook describes the historical and legal background to the TRIPS Agreement its role in the WTO and its institutional framework and reviews the following areas: general provisions and basic principles; copyright and related rights; trademarks; geographical indications; patents; industrial designs layout-designs undisclosed information and anti-competitive practices; enforcement of IPRs; dispute settlement in the context of the TRIPS Agreement; TRIPS and public health; and current TRIPS issues. It contains a guide to TRIPS notifications by WTO members and describes how to access and make use of the official documentation relating to the TRIPS Agreement and related issues. Furthermore it includes the legal texts of the TRIPS Agreement and the relevant provisions of the WIPO conventions referred to in it as well as subsequent relevant WTO instruments.
WIPO-WTO colloquium papers 2011
The WIPO-WTO Colloquium Papers is a peer-reviewed academic journal published jointly by the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization each year since 2010. Providing a uniquely representative and diverse showcase for emerging IP scholarship from across the globe the journal aims to stimulate analysis and debate on intellectual property (IP) issues particularly of interest to developing countries. And it offers an avenue for the dissemination of a broader and more geographically diverse and representative range of scholarship than is common in much of the academic literature on IP law and policy.
WIPO-WTO colloquium papers 2010
The WIPO-WTO Colloquium Papers is a peer-reviewed academic journal published jointly by the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization each year since 2010. Providing a uniquely representative and diverse showcase for emerging IP scholarship from across the globe the journal aims to stimulate analysis and debate on intellectual property (IP) issues particularly of interest to developing countries. And it offers an avenue for the dissemination of a broader and more geographically diverse and representative range of scholarship than is common in much of the academic literature on IP law and policy.
China - Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights
On 10 April 2007 the United States requested consultations with China concerning certain measures pertaining to the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights in China.
European Communities - Protection of Trademarks and Geographical Indications for Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs
On 1 June 1999 the US requested consultations with the EC in respect of the alleged lack of protection of trademarks and geographical indications (GIs) for agricultural products and foodstuffs in the EC. The US contended that EC Regulation 2081/92 as amended does not provide national treatment with respect to geographical indications and does not provide sufficient protection to pre-existing trademarks that are similar or identical to a geographical indication. The US considered this situation to be inconsistent with the EC’s obligations under the TRIPS Agreement including but not necessarily limited to Articles 3 16 24 63 and 65 of the TRIPS Agreement...
European Communities - Protection of Trademarks and Geographical Indications for Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs
On 1 June 1999 the US requested consultations with the EC in respect of the alleged lack of protection of trademarks and geographical indications (GIs) for agricultural products and foodstuffs in the EC. The US contended that EC Regulation 2081/92 as amended does not provide national treatment with respect to geographical indications and does not provide sufficient protection to pre-existing trademarks that are similar or identical to a geographical indication. The US considered this situation to be inconsistent with the EC’s obligations under the TRIPS Agreement including but not necessarily limited to Articles 3 16 24 63 and 65 of the TRIPS Agreement...
United States - Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998
On 8 July 1999 the European Communities requested consultations with the United States in respect of Section 211 of the US Omnibus Appropriations Act. The EC and its member States alleged as follows: - Section 211 which was signed into law on 21 October 1998 did not allow the registration or renewal in the United States of a trademark if it was previously abandoned by a trademark owner whose business and assets have been confiscated under Cuban law. - This law provided that no US court shall recognize or enforce any assertion of such rights. - Section 211 US Omnibus Appropriations Act was not in conformity with the US’ obligations under the TRIPS Agreement notably its Article 2 in conjunction with the Paris Convention Article 3 Article 4 Articles 15 to 21 Article 41 Article 42 and Article 62
United States - Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998
On 8 July 1999 the European Communities requested consultations with the United States in respect of Section 211 of the US Omnibus Appropriations Act. The EC and its member States alleged as follows: - Section 211 which was signed into law on 21 October 1998 did not allow the registration or renewal in the United States of a trademark if it was previously abandoned by a trademark owner whose business and assets have been confiscated under Cuban law. - This law provided that no US court shall recognize or enforce any assertion of such rights. - Section 211 US Omnibus Appropriations Act was not in conformity with the US’ obligations under the TRIPS Agreement notably its Article 2 in conjunction with the Paris Convention Article 3 Article 4 Articles 15 to 21 Article 41 Article 42 and Article 62
Canada - Term of Patent Protection
On 6 May 1999 the US requested consultations with Canada in respect of the term of protection granted to patents that were filed in Canada before 1 October 1989. The US contended that the TRIPS Agreement obligates Members to grant a term of protection for patents that runs at least until twenty years after the filing date of the underlying protection and requires each Member to grant this minimum term to all patents existing as of the date of the application of the Agreement to that Member. The US alleged that under the Canadian Patent Act the term granted to patents issued on the basis of applications filed before 1 October 1989 is 17 years from the date on which the patent is issued. The US contended that this situation is inconsistent with Articles 33 65 and 70 of the TRIPS Agreement.
United States - Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act
On 26 January 1999 the European Communities requested consultations with the United States in respect of Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act as amended by the Fairness in Music Licensing Act which was enacted on 27 October 1998. The European Communities contended that Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act permits under certain conditions the playing of radio and television music in public places (bars shops restaurants etc.) without the payment of a royalty fee. The European Communities considered that this statute is inconsistent with US obligations under Article 9(1) of the TRIPS Agreement which requires Members to comply with Articles 1-21 of the Berne Convention. The dispute centred on the compatibility of two exemptions provided for in Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act with Article 13 of the TRIPS Agreement which allows certain limitations or exceptions to exclusive rights of copyright holders subject to the condition that such limitations are confined to certain special cases do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work in question and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder: The so-called “business” exemption provided for in sub-paragraph (B) of Section 110(5) essentially allows the amplification of music broadcasts without an authorization and a payment of a fee by food service and drinking establishments and by retail establishments provided that their size does not exceed a certain square footage limit. It also allows such amplification of music broadcasts by establishments above this square footage limit provided that certain equipment limitations are met. The so-called “homestyle” exemption provided for in sub-paragraph (A) of Section 110(5) allows small restaurants and retail outlets to amplify music broadcasts without an authorization of the right holders and without the payment of a fee provided that they use only homestyle equipment (i.e. equipment of a kind commonly used in private homes).
Canada - Term of Patent Protection
On 6 May 1999 the US requested consultations with Canada in respect of the term of protection granted to patents that were filed in Canada before 1 October 1989. The US contended that the TRIPS Agreement obligates Members to grant a term of protection for patents that runs at least until twenty years after the filing date of the underlying protection and requires each Member to grant this minimum term to all patents existing as of the date of the application of the Agreement to that Member. The US alleged that under the Canadian Patent Act the term granted to patents issued on the basis of applications filed before 1 October 1989 is 17 years from the date on which the patent is issued. The US contended that this situation is inconsistent with Articles 33 65 and 70 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Canada - Patent Protection of Pharmaceutical Products
On 19 December 1997 the EC requested consultations with Canada in respect of the alleged lack of protection of inventions by Canada in the area of pharmaceuticals under the relevant provisions of the Canadian implementing legislation in particular the Patent Act. The EC alleged that Canada’s legislation is not compatible with its obligations under the TRIPS Agreement because it does not provide for the full protection of patented pharmaceutical inventions for the entire duration of the term of protection envisaged by Articles 27.1 28 and 33 of the TRIPS Agreement.
India - Patent Protection for Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Chemical Products - Complaint by the European Communities and their Member States
On 28 April 1997 the EC requested consultations with India in respect of the alleged absence in India of patent protection for pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical products and the absence of formal systems that permit the filing of patent applications of and provide exclusive marketing rights for such products. The EC contended that this is inconsistent with India’s obligations under Article 70 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the TRIPS Agreement (see similar US complaint in WT/DS50 where the Panel and Appellate Body reports were adopted on 16 January 1998).
India - Patent Protection for Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Chemical Products
On 7 April 1997 the US requested consultations with Japan in respect of the latter’s prohibition under quarantine measures of imports of certain agricultural products. The US alleged that Japan prohibits the importation of each variety of a product requiring quarantine treatment until the quarantine treatment has been tested for that variety even if the treatment has proved to be effective for other varieties of the same product. The US alleged violations of Articles 2 5 and 8 of the SPS Agreement Article XI of GATT 1994 and Article 4 of the Agreement on Agriculture. In addition the US made a claim for nullification and impairment of benefits.
India - Patent Protection for Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Chemical Products
On 7 April 1997 the US requested consultations with Japan in respect of the latter’s prohibition under quarantine measures of imports of certain agricultural products. The US alleged that Japan prohibits the importation of each variety of a product requiring quarantine treatment until the quarantine treatment has been tested for that variety even if the treatment has proved to be effective for other varieties of the same product. The US alleged violations of Articles 2 5 and 8 of the SPS Agreement Article XI of GATT 1994 and Article 4 of the Agreement on Agriculture. In addition the US made a claim for nullification and impairment of benefits.
WIPO-WTO colloquium papers
The WIPO-WTO Colloquium Papers is a peer-reviewed academic journal published jointly by the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization each year since 2010. Providing a uniquely representative and diverse showcase for emerging IP scholarship from across the globe the journal aims to stimulate analysis and debate on intellectual property (IP) issues particularly of interest to developing countries. And it offers an avenue for the dissemination of a broader and more geographically diverse and representative range of scholarship than is common in much of the academic literature on IP law and policy.