IP QUARTERLY UPDATE: FIRST QUARTER 2005

The document examines the trend of 'TRIPS-plus' provisions in bilateral trade agreements, particularly those involving the United States, which extend copyright terms to 70 years and implement strict Technological Protection Measures (TPMs) based on the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It argues these measures undermine the public domain and impede access to knowledge in developing countries. Additionally, the report tracks Q1 2005 developments in the WTO, WIPO, CBD, WHO, and UNESCO, highlighting stalemates over pharmaceutical compulsory licensing, disclosure requirements for genetic resources, and the future work program of the Standing Committee on the Law of Patents.

• Bilateral trade agreements, especially those involving the United States, frequently establish copyright protection levels that exceed multilateral requirements, specifically extending the term of protection to 70 years from the date of publication or creation, compared to the TRIPS minimum of 50 years.
• The use of Technological Protection Measures (TPMs) creates 'virtual fences' around digital content, which can prevent the public from exercising legal exceptions and limitations to copyright, even for non-infringing uses.
• Several U.S. free trade agreements with countries such as Chile, Morocco, and Bahrain implement a maximalist TPM regime based on the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which prohibits the circumvention of access controls and the sale of circumvention devices.
• At the WTO Council for TRIPS, a stalemate persisted in March 2005 regarding a permanent solution for countries with insufficient pharmaceutical manufacturing capacity to use compulsory licensing, with the African Group and the U.S. disagreeing on whether the Chairman’s Statement must be part of the amendment.
• Developing countries, including Brazil and India, are advocating for the introduction of disclosure requirements in the TRIPS Agreement to prevent bio-piracy and ensure benefit-sharing for genetic resources and traditional knowledge, a move opposed by the U.S., Canada, Japan, and the EU.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (2005). IP QUARTERLY UPDATE: FIRST QUARTER 2005. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IP_Update_1Q05.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. IP QUARTERLY UPDATE: FIRST QUARTER 2005. 2005. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IP_Update_1Q05.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=IP QUARTERLY UPDATE: FIRST QUARTER 2005 |date=2005 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IP_Update_1Q05.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2005quarterly, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{IP QUARTERLY UPDATE: FIRST QUARTER 2005}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2005}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IP_Update_1Q05.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }