INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT: OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN MULTILATERAL, PLURILATERAL, AND BILATERAL FORA

The report examines the shift in intellectual property standard-setting from multilateral forums like the WTO and WIPO to bilateral and regional trade agreements. It highlights the risk of "TRIPS-plus" provisions—standards exceeding the WTO's TRIPS Agreement—which erode flexibilities for developing countries. A central focus is the application of non-violation complaints in bilateral deals (e.g., US-Chile, CAFTA), which the authors argue could make WTO discussions irrelevant and restrict the right of states to regulate IP in the public interest. The document also updates activities in the TRIPS Council, WIPO's committees on patents and genetic resources, and various UN agencies regarding traditional knowledge and public health.

• Developed countries, particularly the United States, are increasingly using bilateral and regional agreements to implement "TRIPS-plus" standards that exceed the minimum requirements of the TRIPS Agreement and erode its inherent flexibilities.
• Bilateral agreements such as the US-Chile FTA, CAFTA, and US-Australia FTA have incorporated non-violation complaints into intellectual property disputes, potentially undermining ongoing efforts by developing countries at the WTO to keep such complaints inapplicable to IP.
• Non-violation complaints in bilateral agreements often lack the procedural safeguards found in the WTO's Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), such as the requirement for detailed justification and the lack of obligation to withdraw a WTO-consistent measure.
• In the WTO TRIPS Council, developing countries are pushing for coherence between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), specifically regarding the disclosure of the origin of biological resources and traditional knowledge to prevent misappropriation.
• The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) draft includes several TRIPS-plus requirements, including the principle of regional exhaustion, extended patent terms, and limits on the use of compulsory licenses.
• The IBSA Forum (India, Brazil, and South Africa) has committed to ensuring national legal regimes reflect all TRIPS flexibilities and to rejecting bilateral trade agreements containing TRIPS-plus provisions.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (2004). INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT: OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN MULTILATERAL, PLURILATERAL, AND BILATERAL FORA. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IP_Update_2Q04.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT: OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN MULTILATERAL, PLURILATERAL, AND BILATERAL FORA. 2004. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IP_Update_2Q04.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT: OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN MULTILATERAL, PLURILATERAL, AND BILATERAL FORA |date=2004 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IP_Update_2Q04.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2004intellectual, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT: OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN MULTILATERAL, PLURILATERAL, AND BILATERAL FORA}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2004}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IP_Update_2Q04.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }