The TRIPS Agreement obligated each WTO member state to provide stated levels of intellectual property protection. Although commentators broadly agree that the TRIPS Agreement was a watershed event for international intellectual provision, many of its obligations nonetheless fell short of the level of intellectual property rights available in the United States. This article next offers an overview of these FTA “TRIPS-plus” intellectual property obligations. It should be noted that the intellectual property provisions of most of these agreements are lengthy and detailed.
| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdfs:label
| - Intellectual Property and Free Trade Agreements
|
| rdfs:comment
| - The TRIPS Agreement obligated each WTO member state to provide stated levels of intellectual property protection. Although commentators broadly agree that the TRIPS Agreement was a watershed event for international intellectual provision, many of its obligations nonetheless fell short of the level of intellectual property rights available in the United States. This article next offers an overview of these FTA “TRIPS-plus” intellectual property obligations. It should be noted that the intellectual property provisions of most of these agreements are lengthy and detailed.
|
| dcterms:subject
| |
| dbkwik:itlaw/prope...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| abstract
| - The TRIPS Agreement obligated each WTO member state to provide stated levels of intellectual property protection. Although commentators broadly agree that the TRIPS Agreement was a watershed event for international intellectual provision, many of its obligations nonetheless fell short of the level of intellectual property rights available in the United States. For example, U.S. copyright law provides for a term of protection of the life of the author plus 70 years, while a term of life plus 50 years is acceptable under the TRIPS Agreement. U.S. patent law allows patent term to be extended in order to account for long delays in Patent Office acquisition procedures, but the TRIPS Agreement does not require such a measure. The TRIPS Agreement allows WTO member states to disallow the registration of trademarks that are not visually perceivable — an option that blocks protection for such commercial symbols as sounds and scents — but no such blanket restriction exists under U.S. law. In enacting the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Act of 2002, Congress stated that an overall negotiating objective of such agreements was to encourage our treaty partners to agree to “a standard of [intellectual property] protection similar to that found in United States law.” In keeping with this mandate, the United States has entered into numerous Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) that have required their signatories to provide higher levels of intellectual property protection than are required under the TRIPS Agreement. With respect to the intellectual property laws, each of the FTAs stipulates standards that comply with current U.S. law. As a result, the United States need take no action in order to comply with those provisions of the FTA. In contrast, the U.S. treaty partner must often substantially amend its intellectual property laws in order to comply with the FTA. This article next offers an overview of these FTA “TRIPS-plus” intellectual property obligations. It should be noted that the intellectual property provisions of most of these agreements are lengthy and detailed.
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)