Trips Agreement India

In addition to the basic intellectual property standards set out in the TRIPS agreement, many nations have committed to bilateral agreements to adopt a higher level of protection. This collection of standards, known as TRIPS or TRIPS-Plus, can take many forms. [20] One of the general objectives of these agreements is that a 2003 agreement relaxed the requirement of the internal market and allows developing countries to export to other countries with national health problems until exported drugs are part of a trade or industrial policy. [10] Drugs exported under such regulations may be packaged or coloured differently to prevent them from affecting the markets of industrialized countries. Several amendments to the existing Patent Amendment Act (2005), Copy Right Amendment Act (2010) are being introduced to strengthen the national legal framework to comply with the WTO membership agreement. Similarly, a number of new legislation will be adopted to improve the country`s intellectual property regime. The most important provisions for adapting to anticipated intellectual property rights are provided below. Trips-plus conditions, which impose standards beyond TRIPS, have also been verified. [38] These free trade agreements contain conditions that limit the ability of governments to introduce competition for generic drug manufacturers. In particular, the United States has been criticized for promoting protection far beyond the standards prescribed by the TRIPS. The U.S. free trade agreements with Australia, Morocco and Bahrain have expanded patentability by making patents available for new uses of known products. [39] The TRIPS agreement authorizes the granting of compulsory licences at the discretion of a country.

The terms of trips plus in the U.S. Free Trade Agreement with Australia, Jordan, Singapore and Vietnam have limited the application of mandatory licences to emergencies, remedies for cartels and abuse of dominance, and cases of non-commercial public use. [39] The 2002 Doha Declaration confirmed that the TRIPS agreement should not prevent members from taking the necessary measures to protect public health. Despite this recognition, less developed countries have argued that flexible TRIPS provisions, such as mandatory licensing, are almost impossible to obtain. The least developed countries, in particular, have made their young domestic manufacturing and technological industries proof of the infallible policy. Since the TRIPS agreement came into force, it has been criticized by developing countries, scientists and non-governmental organizations. While some of this criticism is generally opposed to the WTO, many proponents of trade liberalization also view TRIPS policy as a bad policy.