Salient Features Of Trips Agreement

Article 25.1 of the ON TRIPS agreement requires members to provide for the protection of independently established industrial models, which are new or original. Members may anticipate that the designs are not new or original if they are not significantly different from known designs or combinations of known features. Members may anticipate that this protection does not apply to specific constructions primarily for technical or functional reasons. In order to address the above shortcomings and create new standards, the Punta del East Ministerial Conference in September 1986 launched Uruguay`s round of multilateral trade negotiations. The United States and Japan presented a proposal to the Preparatory Committee for the ™ round covering all intellectual property rights and their application. [4] However, Brazil and Argentina refused admission. Ministers included the issue of the “commercial aspect of intellectual property rights,” including trade in counterfeit goods. This round was the most comprehensive and comprehensive multilateral agreement in the field of intellectual property. It covered the entire territory and added the most favoured application, acquisition and national obligation to the existing rules. The negotiations had to focus on the issue of trade in counterfeit goods, given the work already done under the GATT.

The pressure on developing countries to ratify the GATT has been enormous. A powerful group of U.S. chemical, pharmacy, computer, entertainment, publishing and electronics groups has committed with the U.S. government[5] to introduce intellectual property issues into GATT`s multilateral trade negotiations. The chairman of the board of directors of the American pharmaceutical company Pfizer was seen as the driving force behind this process. In 1981, he was appointed chair of the Trade Negotiations Advisory Committee to organize U.S. trade policy. Thirteen major U.S. groups have created the Intellectual Property Rights Committee (IPRC) to set an agenda for what it wants to achieve through international trade negotiations.

To increase the pressure that the United States adopted in 1988 to encourage U.S. exports and reduce the U.S. trade deficit. It referred to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which authorized the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to identify countries that deny adequate and effective protection of intellectual property, identify priority countries that are IPR transgressions and do not make progress in negotiations with the USTR, and include expedited investigations into Section 301 on the practices of those priority countries. [6] On 25 May 1989, the USTR office, 17 countries were named on the IP watch list and 8 countries were named on the watch priority list. [7] India was among the latest in its request for improved and appropriate patent protection for all categories of inventions under the USTR Accelerated Action Plan. [8] Like the US Pharmaceuticals Manufacturers Association (PMP), a complaint was filed against Brazil`s drug patent regime and was declared inappropriate.