Abstract
There are a number of key issues which are of relevance from a human security angle in the area of copyright and related rights and industrial property. They center on the need to balance private rights versus public rights so as to ensure that basic human security—life, food, and heath—are not negatively impacted.
This chapter identifies and discusses the relationship between various intellectual property rights and key aspects of human security such as education, technology transfer, the environment, health, food security and the survival of indigenous peoples.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Wong 2010, 10.
- 2.
WIPO 2004, 41.
- 3.
Chon 2011, 5.
- 4.
WIPO 2004, 267.
- 5.
Wolfensohn 1998, iii.
- 6.
Id., 12.
- 7.
Id., 13.
- 8.
WIPO 2009, para 5.
- 9.
CIPR 2002, 18.
- 10.
Chon 2011, 9.
- 11.
For a related discussion see, Torremans 2004.
- 12.
Sections 107 to 118, title 17, US Code. See the consolidated US copyright laws at http://www.copyright.gov/title17/. Accessed 29 may 2012.
- 13.
Copyright Act of 1957, Indian Copyright Office.
- 14.
Ibid., 20.
- 15.
Knights 2001, para 7. See also Senftleben 2004.
- 16.
Kur and Ruse-Khan 2008, 8.
- 17.
Id., 8.
- 18.
Chon, 13.
- 19.
WIPO 2003.
- 20.
Ibid., 95.
- 21.
Council Directive 93/98/EEC, of 29 October 1993, harmonized the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights.
- 22.
Ibid., 20.
- 23.
Shabalala 2011, 11.
- 24.
Id.
- 25.
On Peer-to-Peer file sharing see Tanaka 2001, 37–84.
- 26.
Ibid., 13.
- 27.
Moohr 2003, 733.
- 28.
Id.
- 29.
Nicholson 2006. IFLA is the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.
- 30.
Ibid., 313.
- 31.
See WIPO 2011, Draft treaty on Exceptions and Limitations for the Persons with Disabilities, Educational and Research Institutions, Libraries and Archives, SCCR/22/12. Available at http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=169397. Accessed on 29 May 2012.
- 32.
Preamble of WCT.
- 33.
Musungu and Dutfield 2003, 3.
- 34.
Kur and Ruse-Khan 2008, 1.
- 35.
Ibid.
- 36.
Id., 3.
- 37.
Id., 5.
- 38.
WIPO 1975, 3.
- 39.
Ibid., 7.
- 40.
For a brief explanation of each of these please see Chap. 3, “The Role of Intellectual Property in Development and WIPO’s Development Cooperation Program,” in WIPO Handbook on Intellectual Property, WIPO 2004, 172–178.
- 41.
Dinopoulos and Kottaridi 2004, 500. Their arguments conform with prior work undertaken that showed that “patent policy harmonization is not a welfare—(as opposed to growth)—maximizing policy.”(Id., 510). See Grossman and Lai 2004, pp. 1635–53.
- 42.
UNDP 2008.
- 43.
Khaneparkar 2006. He points to two studies on the costs of technology transfer: Branstetter et al. “Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from US Firm-Level Panel Data,” Columbia Business School |Finance and Economics Division, The Chazen Institute, and the NBER Research Draft Paper, December 2002, http://www.econ.yale.edu/seminars/trade/tdw03/branstetter-030505.pdf; Bascavusoglu and Zuniga, “Foreign Patents Rights, Technology & Disembodied Knowledge Transfer Cross Broders: An Empirical Application,” 2001, http://www.econ.kuleugen.ac.be/smye/abstracts/p.502.pdf. See footnotes 14 and 15 of Khaneparkar, Id.
- 44.
WIPO 2004, 35.
- 45.
Ibid.
- 46.
Meir Perez Pugatch 2011, 1.
- 47.
Ibid.
- 48.
Hans Haugen et al. 2011, 10.
- 49.
Id., 11.
- 50.
Ibid.
- 51.
Brundtland 2003, 8.
- 52.
Ibid., 9.
- 53.
Ibid., 11.
- 54.
Carlos Correa has refuted their claims, arguing that “though the pharmaceutical industry undertakes some basic research… in most cases, the discovery of important new drugs is made by public institutions, which later license their development and exploitation to private firms. Some 70 % of drugs with therapeutic gain were produced with government involvement…. Basic research that led to the discovery of potential ‘drug leads’ has almost always been publicly funded at universities, in-house government facilities, or research institutes in Europe, North America, and Japan.” Correa 2002, 264.
- 55.
Gurry 2011.
- 56.
Ibid.
- 57.
Ibid.
- 58.
See Collins-Chase 2008.
- 59.
Kongolo 2002, 185.
- 60.
Menon 2009, 11.
- 61.
Keayla 2009, pp. 25–39.
- 62.
Id., 32.
- 63.
Id., 37.
- 64.
Coriat et al. 2006, 1053.
- 65.
Pires de Carvalho 2002, 269.
- 66.
Id., 269.
- 67.
Some developing countries have opted for additional transition period under Article 65.4 of the TRIPS Agreement, allowing them until 1 January 2006 (Cuba, Egypt, India, Madagascar, Pakistan, Qatar, United Arab Emirates). For LDC Members the TRIPS Agreement provides a transition period until 1 January 1996. Under para 7 of the Doha Declaration that LDC country Members will not have to implement or apply the TRIPS Agreement's provisions concerning patents and data protection for drugs before 1 January 2016.
- 68.
Ibid., 268.
- 69.
Pires de Carvalho 2002.
- 70.
European Community 2002.
- 71.
Coriat et al. 2006, 1059.
- 72.
Kongolo 2002, 206.
- 73.
Kongolo 2005, 609.
- 74.
Noehrenberg 2000, 379.
- 75.
Ibid., 381.
- 76.
Kennedy 2010, 473.
- 77.
Cullet 2003.
- 78.
Boyd et al. 2003. They argue that the real question is, given the potential benefits of biotechnology for developing countries, “whether developing countries can change their focus from concerns with monopoly exploitation to the dangers of forgoing opportunities” and “how to induce multinational firms to exploit developing countries.” The suggested subsidization of biotechnology research tailored to developing countries, failing which investments will simply not take place. Id., 230.
- 79.
Haugen 2011, 3. For critiques of this definition see Cullet 2003.
- 80.
Rome Declaration of 1996, World Food Summit, 13–17 November. Available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/w3613e/w3613e00.htm. Accessed on 1 June 2012.
- 81.
United Nations 2000.
- 82.
Leidwein 2011, 2.
- 83.
Id., 2.
- 84.
Ibid.
- 85.
Id., 3.
- 86.
Tejan-Cole 2011, 4.
- 87.
Id., 4.
- 88.
UDHR, 10 December 1948 General Assembly resolution 217 A (III).
- 89.
See generally Alfredsson and Eide 1999.
- 90.
ICESCR adopted and opened for signature, ratification, and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966.
- 91.
ICESCR, Ibid.
- 92.
Haugen et al. 2011, 5.
- 93.
CESCR, “The nature of States parties obligations (Art. 2, para. 1),” 12/14/1990. CESCR General comment 3.
- 94.
CESCR, “Substantive Issues Arising in the Implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: General Comment 12,” E/C.12/1999/5,12 May 1999. Available at http://daccess-ods.un.org/TMP/1560313.html.
- 95.
Ibid.
- 96.
CESCR, General Comment No. 17, 2005, The right of everyone to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary, or artistic production of which he or she is the author, E/C.12/GC/17,12/01/2006.
- 97.
CESCR, General Comment 12.
- 98.
FAO 2005. Adopted by the 127th Session of the FAO Council November 2004.
- 99.
FAO 2005.
- 100.
United Nations 2008, The Right to Food, A/Res/63/187.
- 101.
In the context of the increasing foreign direct investment in agriculture, which reached some US$ 3 billion by 2005–2006, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Olivier de Schutter, has criticized the WTO’s “trade centric” approach to human security, noting that “The impact of trade rules can no longer be seen at the level of States alone. It must be sensitive to what really determines food security: who produces for whom, at what price, under which conditions, and with what economic, social and environmental repercussions. The right to food is not a commodity, and we must stop treating it that way.” He continued, “The policies currently shaped by the international trade regime are not supportive of these small-scale farmers. Instead, we impose a lose–lose upon them. They do not benefit from the opportunities that access to international markets represents for some. But it is they who are the victims of the pressure on land, water and natural resources on which they depend, for which they increasingly have to compete with the agro-export sector.” Olivier de Schutter, “WTO defending an outdated vision of food security—UNfood expert,” 16 December 2011. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=11720&LangID=E. See the Special Rapporteur’s report on “Agribusiness and the Right to Food,” 22 December 2009, A/HRC/13/33.
- 102.
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, A/63/278, 21 October 2008, para 25.
- 103.
Ibid., para 28.
- 104.
Tejan-Cole 2011, 6.
- 105.
Id., 3.
- 106.
Cullet 2003, 4.
- 107.
Haugen 2011, 8.
- 108.
Id., 9.
- 109.
Id., 9.
- 110.
Ibid.
- 111.
Id., 13.
- 112.
Haugen 2011, 13.
- 113.
UNDP 2008, 25.
- 114.
UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food 2009, para 27.
- 115.
Id., para 25.
- 116.
UNDP Guidelines, 2008, 5–6.
- 117.
UNDP 2008, 7.
- 118.
WIPO 2004, 334.
- 119.
Id., 340.
- 120.
Ibid.
- 121.
Id., 334.
- 122.
Id., 338.
- 123.
Leidwein 2011, 4.
- 124.
Id., 4.
- 125.
Haugen 2011, 16.
- 126.
Id., 16.
- 127.
See Byle and Fischer 2002.
- 128.
Haugen 2011, 18.
- 129.
Cullet 2003, 6–7.
- 130.
Id., 7. Pursuant to the adoption of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture some 11 International Agricultural Centres of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) holding ex situ collections of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, as well as the Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza and two of the four organizations hosting collections as part of the International Coconut Genetic Resources Network, have placed the collections they host under the framework of the Treaty, to be accessed according to the same rules. Using a Standard Material Transfer Agreement, recipients may use the materials for food and agriculture for free, or for the minimal costs involved. Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Seed policies and the right to food: enhancing agrobiodiversity and encouraging innovation. 23 July 2009, A/64/170, paras 21–23. The text of the ITPGRFA is available at http://www.fao.org/Ag/cgrfa/itpgr.htm. Accessed on 1 June 2012.
- 131.
Haugen 2011, 19.
- 132.
Cullet 2003, 7–8.
- 133.
Haugen 2011, 20.
- 134.
UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food 2009, para 45.
- 135.
Haugen 2011, 20.
- 136.
Id., 20.
- 137.
See Cullet 2003, 21–24.
- 138.
See Graff et al. 2002.
- 139.
Haugen et al. 2011, 22.
- 140.
Ibid.
- 141.
UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food 2009, para 41.
- 142.
CIPR, 73.
- 143.
Id., 73.
- 144.
Wong 2011, 35.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ramcharan, R. (2013). Human Security Aspects of the Intellectual Property Regime. In: International Intellectual Property Law and Human Security. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-900-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-900-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherlands
Print ISBN: 978-90-6704-899-6
Online ISBN: 978-90-6704-900-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)
