Advertisement

Exploring the Conceptual Domains for Patent Discourse in Global Trade Relations

  • Poku Adusei
Chapter

Abstract

As mentioned in chapter “General Introduction and Overview”, the possibility of promoting social benefits through patents is highly debated by scholars and researchers. This debate has elicited calls for steps to be taken to make the globalized patent legal regime more equitable in order to scale up access to medicines to treat pandemics in poor regions such as SSA. The debate evidences the re-directed focus of international patent discourse from one concerned with ‘pure’ free trade to a discourse that also considers public health and development. This chapter revisits the discourse about pharmaceutical patents and also nuances that debate in the context of a quadripartite framework of patent laws, patent institutions, patent practices, and patent politics.

Keywords

World Trade Organization Supra Note Compulsory License World Intellectual Property Organization Trips Agreement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Bibliography

Literature

  1. ’t Hoen EFM (2009) The global politics of pharmaceutical monopoly power: drug patents, access, innovation and the application of WTO declaration on TRIPS and public health. AMB, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  2. Agbakwa S (2003) A Line in the Sand: International (Dis)Order and the Impunity of the Non-State Corporate Actors in the Developing World. In: Anghie A et al (eds) The Third World and International Order: Law, Politics and Globalization. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, p 1Google Scholar
  3. Agyebeng WK (2006) Theory in search of practice: the right of innocent passage in the Territorial Sea. Cornell Int Law J 39:371Google Scholar
  4. Amollo R (2009) Revisiting the TRIPS Regime: Rwanda-Canadian ARV Drug Deal ‘Tests’ the WTO General Council Decision. RADIC 17:240Google Scholar
  5. Anghie A (2005) Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anghie A et al (eds) (2003) The third world and international order: law, politics and globalization. Martinus Nijhoff, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  7. Austin J (1955/1832) The Province of Jurisprudence Determined. In: Hart HLA (ed). London: Weidenfield & NicholsonGoogle Scholar
  8. Babar ZUD et al (2007) Evaluating drug prices, availability, affordability and price components: implications for access to drugs in Malaysia. PLoS Med 4:82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Basheer S, Primi A (2009) The WIPO development agenda: factoring in the ‘Technologically Proficient’ developing countries. In: de Beer J (ed) Implementing the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Development Agenda. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Ottawa, p 100Google Scholar
  10. Bhagwati J (2004) In defense of globalization. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Bond P (1999) Globalisation, Pharmaceutical Pricing, and South African Health Policy: Managing Confrontation with U.S. Firms and Politicians. Int J Health Ser 29(4):765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bork RH (2003) Coercing virtue: the worldwide rule of judges. AEI Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  13. Braithwaite J, Drahos P (2000) Global business regulation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Bush R (2007) Poverty & neoliberalism: persistence and reproduction in the global south. Pluto Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Cann WA (2004) On the relationship between intellectual property rights and the need of less-developed countries for access to pharmaceuticals: creating a legal duty to supply under a theory of progressive global constitutionalism. U Pa J Int Econ Law 25:755Google Scholar
  16. Chen A (2008) A reflection on the south-south coalition in the last half-century from the perspective of International Economic Law-Making. In: Lee Y-S (ed) Economic development through world trade: a developing world perspective. Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands, p 33Google Scholar
  17. Chimni BS (2003) Third World Approaches to International Law: a manifesto. In: Anghie A et al (eds) The Third World and International Order: Law, Politics and Globalization. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, p 47Google Scholar
  18. Chimni B (2008) WTO, democracy, and development: a view from the south. In: Lee Y-S (ed) Economic development through world trade: a developing world perspective. Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands, p 67Google Scholar
  19. Chomsky N (1999) Profit over people: neo-liberalism and the global order. Seven Stories Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Cullet P (2003) Patents and health in developing countries. In: Hatchard J, Perry-Kessaris A (eds) Law and development: facing complexity in the 21st century. Cavendish, London, p 78Google Scholar
  21. Dinwoodie GD, Dreyfuss RC (2007) Diversifying without discriminating: complying with the mandates of the TRIPS agreement. Mich Telecommun Technol Law Rev 13:445Google Scholar
  22. Drahos P (2003) When the weak bargain with the strong: negotiations in the World Trade Organization. Int Negotiation 8(1):79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Drahos P (2005) Death of patent system – introduction. In: Drahos P (ed) Death of patents. Lawtext, London, p 1Google Scholar
  24. Drahos P, Braithwaite J (2004) Who owns the knowledge economy: political organizing behind TRIPS. Corner House Briefing 32:1, Online: http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk Google Scholar
  25. Dunoff JL (1999) Does globalization advance human rights? Brook J Int Law 25:125Google Scholar
  26. Dutfield G (2005) Is the world ready for substantive patent law harmonization? a lesson from history. In: Drahos P (ed) Death of patents. Lawtext, London, p 228Google Scholar
  27. Dworkin R (1971) Taking rights seriously. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  28. Fisher WW, Syed T (2007) Global justice in healthcare: developing drugs for the developing world. UC Davis Law Rev 40:581Google Scholar
  29. Friedman T (2000) The Lexus and the Olive Tree. Farrar, Straus & Giroux, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Fuller LL (1948) The case of the speluncean explorers. Harv Law Rev 62:616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fuller LL (1964) The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  32. Fuller LL (1969) Human Interaction and the Law. Am J Juris 14:1Google Scholar
  33. Gagnon M-A, Lexchin J (2008) The cost of pushing pills: a new estimate of pharmaceutical promotion expenditures in the United States. PLoS Med 5:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ganslandt M et al (2005) Developing and distributing essential medicines to poor countries: the DEFEND proposal. In: Fink C, Maskus KE (eds) Intellectual Property and Development: Lessons from Recent Economic research. Oxford University Press, New York, p 207Google Scholar
  35. Gibson J (ed) (2008) Patenting lives: life patents, culture and development. Ashgate, SurreyGoogle Scholar
  36. Gold ER et al (2004) The unexamined assumptions of intellectual property: adopting an evaluative approach to patenting biotechnological innovation. Public Aff Q 18(4):299Google Scholar
  37. Gold R et al (2008) Toward a New Era of Intellectual Property: From Confrontation to Negotiation. A Report from the International Expert Group on Biotechnology, Innovation and Intellectual Property. Online: http://www.theinnovationpartnership.org/data/ieg/documents/report/TIP_Report_E.pdf
  38. Gyekye K (1994) Taking development seriously. J Appl Philos 11:45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hart HLA (1961) The concept of law. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  40. Helfer LR (2004) Regime shifting: the TRIPs Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking. Yale J Int Law 29:1Google Scholar
  41. Heller M (2008) The gridlock economy: how too much ownership wrecks markets, stops innovation, and costs lives. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Henkin L et al (1993) International law, 3rd edn. West, St PaulGoogle Scholar
  43. Herder M, Gold ER (2008) Intellectual property issues in biotechnology: health and industry. Online: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/9/40181372.pdf
  44. Hestermeyer H (2007) Human rights and the WTO: the case of patents and access to medicines. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  45. Idris K (2003) Intellectual property: a power tool for economic growth, 2nd edn. WIPO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  46. Ismail F (2008) One year since the WTO Hong Kong Ministerial Conference: Developing Countries Reclaim the Development Content of the WTO Doha Round. In: Lee Y-S (ed) Economic development through world trade: a developing world perspective. Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands, p 121Google Scholar
  47. Kitch EW (1994) The patent policy of developing countries. UCLA Pac Basin Law J 13:166Google Scholar
  48. La Croix S, Liu M (2008) Patents and access to essential medicines. In: Maskus KE (ed) Intellectual property, growth and trade. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lai EL-C (2008) The Theory of International Policy Coordination in the Protection of Ideas. In: Maskus KE (ed) Intellectual property, growth and trade. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lee Y-S (2006) Reclaiming development in the world trading system. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lee Y-S (ed) (2008a) Economic development through world trade: a developing world perspective. Kluwer Law International, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  52. Lee Y-S (2008b) Development and the World Trade Organization: Proposal for the Agreement on Development and the Council for Trade and Development in the WTO. In: Lee Y-S (ed) Economic development through world trade: a developing world perspective. Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands, p 3Google Scholar
  53. Lucyk S (2007) Patents, politics and public health access to essential medicines under the TRIPS Agreement. Ottawa Law Rev 38:191Google Scholar
  54. Manderson D (2008) ‘As If’: The Court of Shakespeare and the Relationships of Law and Literature. Law Cult Humanities 4:29Google Scholar
  55. Maskus KE (2008) Incorporating a globalized intellectual property rights regime into an economic development strategy. In: Maskus KE (ed) Intellectual property, growth and trade. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mgbeoji I (2006) Global biopiracy: patents, plants, and indigenous knowledge. UBC Press, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  57. Morin J-F (2006) Tripping up TRIPS debates: IP and health in bilateral agreements. Int J Intellect Prop Manag 1:37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Oddi AS (1987) The international patent system and third world development: reality or myth? Duke Law J 63:831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Oguamanam C (2006) International law and indigenous knowledge: intellectual property, plant biodiversity, and traditional medicine. University of Toronto Press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  60. Oguamanam C (2008) Local knowledge as trapped knowledge: intellectual property, culture, power and politics. J World Intellect Prop 11:29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Oppong RF (2011) Legal aspects of economic integration in Africa. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ostergard RL (2003) The Development Dilemma: The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Rights in the International System. LFB Scholarly, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  63. Parlett K (2011) The individual in the international legal system: continuity and change in International Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Poulantzas N (1975) Classes in contemporary capitalism. New Left Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  65. Pound R (1960) Mechanical jurisprudence. In: Henson RD (ed) Landmarks of law. Beacon Press, Boston, p 101Google Scholar
  66. Putman J (2008) The Law and Economics of International Intellectual Property: a primer. In: Maskus KE (ed) Intellectual property, growth and trade. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 19Google Scholar
  67. Rahmatian A (2009) Neo-colonial aspects of global intellectual property protection. J World Intellect Prop 12:40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rajagopal B (2003) International law, and the third world resistance: a theoretical inquiry. In: Anghie A et al (eds) The Third World and International Order: Law, Politics and Globalization. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, p 145Google Scholar
  69. Ramanna A (2005) Shifts in India’s policy on intellectual property: the role of ideas, coercion and changing interests. In: Drahos P (ed) Death of patents. Lawtext, London, p 150Google Scholar
  70. Rikowski R (2003) Tripping over TRIPS?: an assessment of the World Trade Organization Agreement on trade related aspects of intellectual property rights, focusing in particular on trade, moral and information issues. Bus Inf Rev 20(3):149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Saul JS (2004) Globalization, imperialism, development: false binaries and radical resolutions. Socialist Register 223Google Scholar
  72. Segger M-CC (2008) Sustainable Development in International Law. In: Bugge HC, Voigt C (eds) Sustainable Development in International and National Law. Europa Law, Groningen, p 87Google Scholar
  73. Sell SK (1998) Powers and ideas: north-south politics of intellectual property and anti-trust. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  74. Sell SK (2002) Post-TRIPS development: the tension between commercial and social agendas in the context of intellectual property. Fla J Int Law 14:193Google Scholar
  75. Sell SK (2003) Private Power, Public Law: The Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Shaffer G et al (2008) The trials of winning at the WTO: what lies behind Brazil’s success. Cornell Int Law J 41:383Google Scholar
  77. Sheerwood R (1990) Intellectual property and economic development. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  78. Sismondo S (2007) Ghost management: how much of the medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the pharmaceutical industry? PLoS Med 4:1429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sornarajah M (2003) Economic neo-liberalism and the International Law on Foreign Investment. In: Anghie A et al (eds) The third world and international order: law, politics and globalization. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, p 173Google Scholar
  80. Sterckx S (2005) The ethics of patenting – uneasy justifications. In: Drahos P (ed) Death of patents. Lawtext, London, p 172Google Scholar
  81. Stiglitz JE (2002) Globalization and its discontents. W.W. Norton & Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  82. Stiglitz JE (2008) Economic Foundations of Intellectual Property Rights. Duke Law J 57:1693Google Scholar
  83. Stiglitz JE, Charlton A (2005) Fair trade for all: how trade can promote development. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  84. Sykes AO (2002) TRIPS, pharmaceuticals, developing countries and the Doha ‘Solution’. Chicago J Int Law 3:47Google Scholar
  85. Thambisetty S (2007) Patents as credence goods. Oxf J Leg Stud 27(4):707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. The International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) (2008). Online: http://www.ifpmAorg/index.php?id=418
  87. The US Government Accountability Office (2006) New Drug Development, Science, Business, Regulatory, and Intellectual Property Issues cited as Hampering Drug Development Efforts. In: a Report of the United States Government Accountability Office. Online: http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20061219094529-73424.pdf
  88. Timmermans K (2005) Intertwining regimes: trade, intellectual property and regulatory requirements for pharmaceuticals. J World Intellect Prop 8:67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Tsai G (2009) Canada’s access to medicines regime: lessons for compulsory licensing schemes under the WTO Doha DECLARATION. VA J Int Law 39:1063Google Scholar
  90. Tussie D (2008) Trade diplomacy and development clubs: the interaction in the Americas. In: Lee Y-S (ed) Economic development through world trade: a developing world perspective. Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands, p 149Google Scholar
  91. UNDP (2003) Making Global Trade Work for People 221. Online: http://www.undp.org/dpa/publications/globaltrade.pdf
  92. Walker S (2001) The TRIPS agreement, sustainable development and the public interest. IUCN Environ Policy Law Paper 41Google Scholar

Treaties and Legislation

  1. Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 1994, 33 ILM 81.Google Scholar
  2. Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, 1883, 21 UST 1538, 828 UNTS 305.Google Scholar
  3. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works 1886, 828 UNTS 221.Google Scholar
  4. International Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations, 1961.Google Scholar
  5. Treaty on Intellectual Property in Respect of Integrated Circuits, 1989, 28 ILM 1477.Google Scholar
  6. Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO, 1994, 33 ILM 1140.Google Scholar
  7. Intellectual Property Law, 1997 (Brazil).Google Scholar
  8. Medicines and Related Substances Control (Amendment) Act No.90 of 1997 (South Africa).Google Scholar
  9. National Health Insurance Act, 2003 (Act 650) (Ghana).Google Scholar

Jurisprudence

  1. Pharmaceutical Manufacturers’ Association of South Africa et al v President of the Republic of South Africa, Case No.4183/98, filed 18 February 1998.Google Scholar
  2. Brazil – Measures Affecting Patent Protection, Complaint by the US (WT/DS199/3) (2001).Google Scholar

Documents

  1. US Government Accountability Office, “New Drug Development, Science, Business, Regulatory, and Intellectual Property Issues cited as Hampering Drug Development Efforts” in a Report of the United States Government Accountability Office (November 2006).Google Scholar
  2. International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) 2008, online: <http://www.ifpma.org/index.php?id=418>
  3. Doha Ministerial Declaration, WTO DoCWT/MIN(01)/DEC/1, 41 ILM 746 (2002).Google Scholar
  4. Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health in 2001, WTO Doc.WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2, 41 ILM 755 (2001).Google Scholar
  5. WTO General Council, Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, WT/L/540 (30 August 2003).Google Scholar
  6. WIPO, Draft Substantive Patent Law Treaty, SCP/10/2.Google Scholar
  7. North, Douglass C. “The New Institutional Economics and Development”, online: <http://www.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/NewInstE.North.pdf>.
  8. UN Department of Economic & Social Affairs, UNCTAD Secretariat and International Bureau of the WIPO. The Role of the Patent System in the Transfer of Technology to Developing Countries (1974) UN DoC TD/B/AC11/19.Google Scholar
  9. UK, Report of Commission on Intellectual Property Rights: Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy (September 2002).Google Scholar
  10. Drahos, Peter & Braithwaite, John. “Who Owns the Knowledge Economy: Political Organizing Behind TRIPS” (2004) Corner House Briefing 32, 1, online: <http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk>.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of GhanaAccraGhana

Personalised recommendations