Abstract
This chapter aims to discuss some of the defects of the World Trade Organization (WTO) as they affect the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The criticisms of TRIPS detailed in other chapters in this book demonstrate how it is potentially damaging to global public welfare. However, the alternatives to TRIPS could be even more harmful, since developing countries would be even more vulnerable to unilateral pressures and sanctions, and coerced bilateral agreements.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barnes, J.J. (1974) Authors, Publishers and Politicians. The Quest for an Anglo-American Copyright Agreement1815–1854 (London: RKP).
Bhagwati, J. and H.T. Patrick (eds) (1990) Aggressive Unilateralism. America’s 301 Trade Policy and the World Trading System (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press).
Drahos, P. (ed.) (1999) Intellectual Property, International Library of Essays in Law and Legal Theory (Aldershot, Ashgate-Dartmouth).
European Commission (2000) ‘Trade Barriers Regulation: the First Five Years’, conference on The Challenge of Globalisation: the European Union’s Market Access Strategy, Brussels.
Evans, G. (1996) ‘The Principle of National Treatment and the International Protection of Industrial Property’, European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 149–60.
Helfer, L.R. (1998) ‘Adjudicating Copyright Claims under TRIPS Agreement. The Case for a European Human Rights Analogy’, Harvard International Law Journal, vol. 39, no. 2, p. 357.
Helfer, L.R. (1999) ‘A European Human Rights Analogy for Adjudicating Copyright Claims under TRIPS’, European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 8–16.
Howse, R. (2000) ‘Adjudicative Legitimacy and Treaty Interpretation in International Trade Law: the Early Years of WTO Jurispudence’, in J.H.H. Weiler (ed.), The EU, the WTO, and the NAFTA. Towards a Common Law of lnternational Trade? (Oxford: OUP), pp. 35–69.
Klug, H. (2000) Constituting Democracy. Law, Globalism and South Africa’s Political Reconstruction (Cambridge: CUP).
McCluggage, L.A. (2000) ‘Section 110(5) and the Fairness in Music Licensing Act: Will the WTO Decide the United States Must Pay to Play?’ Idea: The Journal of Law and Technology, vol. 40, pp. 1–47.
Macdonald, R.S.J. (1993) ‘The Margin of Appreciation’, in R. S. J. Macdonald, F. Matscher and H. Petzold (eds), The European System for the Protection ofHuman Rights (Dordrecht: Nijhoff), pp. 83–124.
McGinnis, J.O. and M.L. Movesian (2000) ‘The World Trade Constitution’, Harvard Law Review, vol. 114, pp. 512–605.
Mahoney, P. (1998) ‘Marvellous Richness of Diversity or Invidious Cultural Relativism?’, Human Rights Law Journal (Special Issue on The Doctrine of Margin of Appreciation under the European Convention on Human Rights: its Legitimacy in Theory and Application in Practice), vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–6.
Mavroidis, P.C. and W. Zdouc (1998) ‘Legal Means to Protect Private Parties’ Interests in the WTO’, Journal ofInternational Economic Law, vol. 1, pp. 407–32.
Mehra, M. (2000) Human Rights and the WTO: Time to Take on the Challenge, published on the WTOwatch website at http://www.wtowatch.org.
Moore, M. (2000) ‘The Backlash against Globalization?’, speech delivered in Ottawa, 26 October (published on the WTO website http://www.wto.org, accessed 27 January 2001).
Oloka-Onyango, J. and D. Udagama (2000) Preliminary Report on Globalization and its Impact on the Full Enjoyment of Human Rights to the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights of the UN Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/13).
Petersmann, E.-U. (1993) ‘National Constitutions and International Economic Law’, in M. Hilf and E.-U. Petersmann (eds), National Constitutions and International Economic Law (Deventer: Kluwer), pp. 3–53.
Petersmann, Ernst-Ulrich (1998) ‘How to Constitutionalize International Law and Foreign Policy for the Benefit of Civil Society?’, Michigan Journal of lnternational Law vol. 20, p. 1.
Petersmann, E.-U. (2000) ‘The WTO Constitution and Human Rights’, Journal of International Economic Law, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 19–25.
Picciotto, Sol (2001) ‘Democratizing Globalism’, in D. Drache (ed.), The Market on the Public Domain? (London: Routledge), pp. 335–59.
Plant, A. (1934) ‘The Economic Theory Concerning Patents for Inventions.’ Economica, n.s. 1(February), p. 45.
Plasseraud, Y. and F. Savignon (1983) [Paris 1883] Genese du Droit Unioniste des Brevets (Paris: Librairies techniques).
Ricketson, S. (1987) The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Deventer: Kluwer & London, Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary College).
Ryan, M.P. (1998) Knowledge Diplomacy. Global Competition and the Politics of Intellectual Property (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press).
Shaffer, Gregory (2000) ‘The Law-in-Action of International Trade Litigation in the US and Europe: The Melding of the Public and Private’, unpublished paper, draft of 24 May.
Subramaniam, A. and J. Watal (2000). ‘Can TRIPS Serve as an Enforcement Device for Developing Countries in the WTO?’, Journal of International Economic Law, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 403–16.
UN Commission on Human Rights (2000) Intellectual Property Rights and Human Rights. Geneva, Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection ofHuman Rights, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/7.
Van Eeckhaute, J.C. (1999) ‘Private Complaints Against Unfair Trade Practices. The EC’s Trade Barriers Regulation’, Journal of World Trade, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 199–213.
Weiler, J.H.H. (2000) The Rule of Lawyers and the Ethos of Diplomats: Reflections on the Internal and External Legitimacy of WTO Dispute Settlement (Harvard Law School, Harvard Jean Monnet Working Paper 09/00).
WIPO (2000) ‘Suggestions for the Further Development of International Patent Law’. Document SCP/4/2, 25 September.
Zoller, E. (1985) ‘Remedies for Unfair Trade: European and United States Views’, Cornell International Law Journal, vol. 18, p. 227.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2002 Sol Picciotto
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Picciotto, S. (2002). Defending the Public Interest in TRIPS and the WTO. In: Drahos, P., Mayne, R. (eds) Global Intellectual Property Rights. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522923_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522923_14
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-99028-5
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-52292-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)