Abstract
Economists and policy makers face a difficult dilemma in the area of innovation: how to reconcile the aims of intellectual property, which provides innovators with incentives by restricting use of the innovation and thereby guaranteeing extraordinary gains, with a society’s interest in allowing maximum use of innovative products, by keeping their price low and ensuring diffusion, imitation and improvement (OECD, 1992, p. 50).
1. This paper is partially based on a study (‘The TRIPS Agreement: How Much Room for Maneuver is Left?’, 2000) prepared by the author for UNDP.
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.
References
Barrett, Margaret (2000) ‘The United States Doctrine of Exhaustion: Parallel Imports of Patented Goods’, Northern Kentucky Law Review, vol. 27, no. 5.
Bond, Patrick (1999) ‘Globalization, Pharmaceutical Pricing and South African Health Policy: Managing Confrontation with U.S. Firms and Politicians’, International Journal ofHealth Services, vol. 29, no. 4.
Cook, Trevor (1997) ‘Pharmaceutical Patents and the Generic Sector in Europe’, Patent World, issue 97, February 1997, pp. 36–40.
Cornish, W. (1989) Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights (London: Sweet & Maxwell).
Cornish, W. (1998) ‘Experimental Use of Patented Inventions in European Community States’, International Review ofIndustrial Property and Copyright Law C, vol. 29, no. 7.
Correa, Carlos (1999) Intellectual Property Rights and the Use of Compulsory Licenses: Options for Developing Countries (Geneva: South Centre).
Correa, Carlos (2000) ‘Emerging Trends: New Patterns of Technology Transfer’, in S. Patel, P. Roffe and A. Yusuf (eds), International Technology Transfer. The Origins and Aftermath of the United Nations Negotiations on a Draft Code of Conduct (The Hague: Kluwer Law International).
Correa, Carlos and Salvador Bergel (1996) Patentes y Competencia (Santa Fe: Rubinzal-Culzoni).
European Commission (1997) Report on United States Barriers to Trade and Investment (Brussels).
Fugate, W. (1991) Foreign Commerce and Antitrust Laws, 4th edn (Boston, Little, Brown & Co).
Geuze, M. and H. Wager (1999) ’ WTO dispute settlement practice relating to the TRIPS Agreement’, Journal oflnternational Economic Law, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 347–84.
Graz, Dominique (1988) Propriete Intellectuelle et libre circulation des marchandises, (Geneva: Librairie Droz).
Hoekman, Bernard and Michel Kostecki (1997) The Political Economy of the World Trading System. From GATT to WTO (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Jackson, John (2000) The Jurisprudence of GATT & the WTO (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Marceau, Gabrielle and Peter Pedersen (1999) ‘Is the WTO Open and Transparent? A Discussion of the Relationship of the WTO with Non-governmental Organisations and Civil Society’s Claims for more Transparency and Public Participation’, Journal of World Trade, vol. 33, no. 1.
NERA (National Economic Research Associates) (1998) Policy Relating to Generic Medicines in the OECD. Final Report for the European Commission (London: December).
OECD (1992) Technology and the Economy. The Key Relationships (Paris).
Omaji, Paul (1997) ‘Infringement by Unauthorised Importation under Australian Intellectual Property Laws’, European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 10.
Reichman, J. (1993) Implications of the Draft TRIPS Agreement for Developing Countries as Competitors in an Integrated World Market (Geneva: UNCTAD).
Scherer, F. (1999) ‘The Patent System and Innovation in Pharmaceuticals’, paper presented to ‘Colloque de Toulouse: Brevets pharmaceutiques, innovations et sante publique’, Toulouse, Janualy 28–30.
Schott, Jeffrey J. (1994), The Uruguay Round. An Assessment (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics).
Skolnikoff, E. (1993) ‘New International Trends Affecting Science and Technology’, Science and Public Policy, vol. 20, no. 2.
South Centre (1995) The Uruguay Round. Intellectual Property Rights Regime. Implications for Developing Countries (Cartagena).
UNDP (1999) Human Development Report (New York).
Wegner, Harold (1994) Patent Law in Biotechnology, Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals (New York: Stockton Press).
WTO (1995) Environment and TRIPS, WT/CTE/W/8 (Geneva).
Yusuf, Abdulqawi and Andrés Moncayo von Hase (1992), ‘Intellectual Property Protection and International Trade-Exhaustion of Rights Revisited’. World Competition, vol. 16, no. 1, Geneva.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2002 Carlos M. Correa
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Correa, C.M. (2002). Pro-competitive Measures under TRIPS to Promote Technology Diffusion in Developing Countries. In: Drahos, P., Mayne, R. (eds) Global Intellectual Property Rights. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522923_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522923_3
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)