Recently, India and South Africa tested the proposal to derogate from key provisions of the TRIPS Agreement on vaccines, medicines, treatments and related technologies against Covid-19. This proposal has now also been supported by the United States. The TRIPS Agreement is part of the only commitment stemming from the Uruguay Round negotiations. This means that the TRIPS Agreement applies to all WTO Members. It also means that the provisions of the Agreement are subject to the WTO Integrated Dispute Settlement Mechanism contained in the Dispute Settlement Agreement (Agreement on Dispute Settlement Rules and Procedures). In addition to the basic intellectual property standards created by the TRIPS Agreement, many countries have concluded bilateral agreements to introduce a higher standard of protection. This set of standards, known as TRIPS+ or TRIPS-Plus, can take many forms. The general objectives of these agreements are as follows: However, the agreement gives countries different deadlines to delay the application of its provisions. These deadlines define the transition from before the entry into force of the Agreement (before 1 January 1995) to its application in the Member States. The main transitional periods are as follows: This Agreement provides for a review of the provisions of Article 27(3)(b) four years after the entry into force of the Agreement (i.e. 1999).
This review is ongoing at the TRIPS Council. Since the entry into force of travel, it has been criticized by developing countries, academics and non-governmental organizations. While some of these criticisms are directed at the WTO in general, many proponents of trade liberalization also view the TRIPS Agreement as bad policy. The concentration effects of the TRIPS Agreement`s wealth (transfer of money from people in developing countries to copyright and patent holders in developed countries) and the imposition of artificial scarcity on citizens of countries that would otherwise have had weaker intellectual property laws are common grounds for such criticism. Other criticisms have focused on TRIPS` failure to accelerate the flow of investment and technology to low-income countries, an advantage highlighted by WTO members in the run-up to the establishment of the agreement. World Bank statements suggest that the TRIPS Agreement has not led to a demonstrable acceleration of investment in low-income countries, although this may have been the case for middle-income countries. The long duration of TRIPS patents has been studied because it has unduly slowed down the entry of generic substitutes and competition into the market. In particular, the illegality of preclinical studies or the submission of samples for approval until a patent expires has been accused of driving the growth of a few multinationals rather than manufacturers in developing countries. A 2003 agreement relaxed domestic market requirements and allowed developing countries to export to other countries where there is a national health problem, as long as the exported medicines are not part of a trade or industrial policy.  Drugs exported under such a regime may be packaged or coloured in different ways to prevent them from affecting the markets of developed countries. In addition, the Agreement gives Members the freedom to determine the appropriate method of implementing the provisions of the Agreement in their own legal and practical system.
The agreement thus takes into account the diversity of the legal framework of the members (e.B. between the traditions of the common law and civil law). It may also clarify or interpret the provisions of the Agreement. The TRIPS Agreement introduced intellectual property law into the multilateral trading system for the first time and remains the most comprehensive multilateral agreement on intellectual property to date. In 2001, developing countries, concerned that developed countries were insisting on too narrow an interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement, launched a round table that resulted in the Doha Declaration. The Doha Declaration is a WTO declaration that clarifies the scope of the TRIPS Agreement and states, for example, that the TRIPS Agreement can and should be interpreted in light of the objective of « promoting access to medicines for all ». However, the agreement stipulates that Members must ensure the protection of plant varieties, either through patents or through an effective sui generis system (i.e. a system created specifically for this purpose) or through any combination of both. The 2002 Doha Declaration reaffirms that the TRIPS Agreement must not prevent Members from taking the necessary measures to protect public health.
Despite this recognition, less developed countries have argued that flexible travel arrangements, such as . B compulsory licences are almost impossible to apply. The least developed countries, in particular, cited their nascent domestic manufacturing and technology industries as evidence of the brutality of politics. . all categories of intellectual property covered by Sections 1 to 7 of Part II of the Agreement (Article 1.2). These include copyright and related rights, trademarks, geographical indications, designs, patents, integrated circuit designs, and the protection of undisclosed information. The agreement contains a general obligation for the parties to provide interested parties with the legal means to prevent the use of means in the description or presentation of a product that indicate or suggest that the product in question originates in a geographical area other than the actual place of origin in a manner that misleads the public as to the geographical origin of the product. Unlike other intellectual property agreements, the TRIPS Agreement has a powerful enforcement mechanism. States can be sanctioned by the WTO dispute settlement mechanism.
In addition to the notification obligations specifically provided for in the Agreement, a number of provisions of the Berne and Rome Conventions relating to notification are incorporated into the TRIPS Agreement by reference, but without express reference to them. The TRIPS Agreement is an agreement on minimum standards that allows Members to provide more comprehensive protection of intellectual property if they so wish. Members are free to determine the appropriate method for implementing the provisions of the Agreement in their own legal system and practice. Article 69 of the Agreement requires Members to establish and notify contact points in their administrations in order to cooperate with each other to prevent trade in counterfeit goods. The general transitional periods apply to the founding members of the WTO, i.e. governments that were members on 1 January 1995. Since the creation of the WTO, a number of countries have acceded to it. These countries have generally agreed in their accession agreements (accession protocols) to extend the TRIPS Agreement from the moment they officially became Members of the WTO, without any transitional period being used. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is an international agreement between all member states of the World Trade Organization (WTO). It establishes minimum standards for the regulation of various forms of intellectual property (IP) by national governments, as applied to nationals of other WTO member states.  The TRIPS Agreement was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) between 1989 and 1990 and is administered by the WTO. The TRIPS Council is composed of all WTO Members.
It shall be responsible for monitoring the functioning of the Agreement and, in particular, the manner in which Members fulfil their obligations under the Agreement. The WTO is a forum for further negotiations aimed at strengthening commitments in the field of intellectual property, as well as in other areas covered by the WTO Agreements. However, Members may choose to implement laws that provide more comprehensive protection than that required by the Agreement, provided that the additional protection does not violate the provisions of the Agreement. Article 40 of the TRIPS Agreement recognizes that certain licensing practices or conditions relating to intellectual property rights that restrict competition may adversely affect trade and impede the transfer and dissemination of technology (paragraph 1). Member States may, in accordance with the other provisions of the Convention, take appropriate measures to prevent or control abusive and anti-competitive practices in the licensing of intellectual property rights (paragraph 2). The Convention provides for a mechanism whereby a country wishing to take action against practices involving undertakings from another Member State shall enter into consultations with that other Member State and, subject to publicly available non-confidential information relevant to the matter in question and other information available to that Member, subject to national law and mutual agreement. satisfactory agreements on the maintenance of confidentiality by the requesting member (paragraph 3). Similarly, a country whose companies are subject to such measures in another Member State may enter into consultations with that Member (paragraph 4). Each country must ensure that its laws comply with the obligations of the agreement, in accordance with the timetable set out in the agreement.
Most must pass laws that implement the obligations. In addition, paragraph 5 of Article 65 of the TRIPS Agreement provides that countries making use of the transition period shall not be relegated Members enjoying a transitional period (in accordance with Article 65(1), (2), (3) or (4)) shall ensure that changes to their laws, Regulations and practices during the transitional period shall not entail a lesser degree of consistency with the provisions of the Agreement. The terms of the TRIPS Plus Agreement, which prescribe standards other than TRIPS, were also reviewed. These free trade agreements contain conditions that limit the ability of governments to introduce competition for generic manufacturers. In particular, the United States has been criticized for pushing protection far beyond the standards prescribed by the TRIPS Agreement. U.S. free trade agreements with Australia, Morocco, and Bahrain have expanded patentability by requiring patents to be available for new uses of known products. The TRIPS Agreement allows for the issuance of compulsory licenses at the discretion of a country […].