Other international instruments. In the field of competition rules relating to restrictive business practices, the de- velopment of international instruments is marked by hesitancy.78 There seem to be no other binding international79 instruments directly dealing with competi- tion rules that specifically apply to IPR-related restrictive practices. The Set of Multilaterally Agreed Equitable Principles and Rules for the Control of Restric- tive Business Practices, which concerns anticompetitive conduct in general, was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1980 as a non-binding reso- lution only.80 It has the character of a recommendation addressed to Members, and, as such, may have guided the design of competition rules, which so many countries have adopted in recent years.81 Some instruments, such as the Paris Convention for the International Protec- tion of Industrial Property,82 refer indirectly to the existence of abusive practices by dealing with the grant of compulsory licences. The most ambitious effort to establish international rules of competition on IPR-related business practices was 77 See Section 1 of the “Reference Paper” accepted by Members as “additional commitments” when signing the “Fourth Protocol to the General Agreement on Services” of February 15, 1997 (reprinted from 36 Int’l Leg. Mat. 354, 367 (1997):
1. Competitive safeguards
1.1 Prevention of anti-competitive practices in telecommunications Appropriate measures shall be maintained for the purpose of preventing suppliers who, alone or together, are a major supplier from engaging in or continuing anti-competitive practices.
Other international instruments. As discussed throughout in the text, TRIPS draws substantially on the Treaty on Intellectual Property in Respect of Integrated Circuits of 1989, the Washington Treaty. 1007 In practice, ten years was the standard term set out by the SCPA and adopted by the regulations enacted in other developed countries at the time of the negotiation of the Washington Treaty.
Other international instruments. Other multilateral instruments contain provisions offering an opportunity to negotiate commitments for home country measures beneficial to developing countries.70
Other international instruments. 5.2.1 The WIPO-administered conventions
Other international instruments. This Agreement shall not prejudice the rights and obligations stemming from other international instruments to which either country is a Party.
Other international instruments. WIPO conventions that contain provisions relevant to geographical indications are discussed in Section 2.1, above, including the Paris Convention, the Madrid Agree- ment for the Repression of False or Deceptive Indications of Source on Goods and the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their In- ternational Registration. Each of these agreements remains in force. Provisions of the Paris Convention relevant to geographical indications are incorporated by reference in TRIPS (see Chapter 3).
Other international instruments. There is no particular relationship between Article 73 and the provisions on secu- rity exceptions under other international instruments.
Other international instruments. While TRIPS incorporates and cross-references WIPO conventions, the WIPO con- ventions do not in their text incorporate or cross-reference the TRIPS Agreement. However, the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty123 includes a number of “Agreed State- ments”, and among these are three that refer to TRIPS.124 In each case, the pre- sumed objective of the agreed statement is to clarify that the rules adopted at WIPO are consistent with the rules of TRIPS. However, the language used to express this consistency does little to resolve ambiguity. As example, Article 4, WIPO Copyright Treaty and Article 10.1, TRIPS Agree- ment, each provide that computer software is protected by copyright, but the agreements describe the subject matter of “computer programs” differently. The WIPO definition is framed more broadly (“whatever may be the mode or form 123 Adopted in Geneva on 20 December 1996. The treaty is available at <xxxx://xxx.xxxx. int/clea/docs/en/wo/wo033en.htm>. 124 These agreed statements are as follows: “Agreed statements concerning Article 4: The scope of protection for computer programs under Article 4 of this Treaty, read with Article 2, is consistent with Article 2 of the Berne Convention and on a par with the relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.” “Agreed statements concerning Article 5: The scope of protection for compilations of data (databases) under Article 5 of this Treaty, read with Article 2, is consistent with Article 2 of the Berne Convention and on a par with the relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.” “Agreed statements concerning Article 7: It is understood that the obligation under Article 7(1) does not require a Contracting Party to provide an exclusive right of commercial rental to authors who, under that Contracting Party’s law, are not granted rights in respect of phonograms. It is understood that this obligation is consistent with Article 14(4) of the TRIPS Agreement.”
Other international instruments. In December 1996 two new treaties with respect to intellectual property rights were adopted at WIPO: the Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT).247 These two treaties include provisions with respect 246 See Section 6.2 (International instruments) of both Chapters; see also X. Xxxxxx, The Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health: Lighting A Dark Corner at the WTO, in: Journal of International Economic Law (2002), 469–505. 247 World Intellectual Property Organization: Copyright Treaty [adopted in Geneva, Dec. 20, 1996], 36 I.L.M. 65 (1997) and World Intellectual Property Organization: Performances and Phonograms Treaty [adopted in Geneva, Dec. 20, 1996], 36 I.L.M. 76 (1997). to the exhaustion of rights that, like Article 6,248 reflect lack of agreement among governments on a unified approach to exhaustion of rights issues.249 Several of the “agreed statements” to each of the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WPPT address issues related to the issue of exhaustion, for example, by attempting to clarify distinctions between rights to redistribute physical copies of protected works and digital copies of such works.250 The WCT and WPPT are not incorporated in TRIPS, and their rules (including agreed statements) are not subject to WTO dispute settlement. At present, there are a limited number of state parties to these agreements. However, it is possible that in the future these agreements will have sufficiently wide adherence among WTO Members that a dispute settlement panel or the AB might look to them as evidence of state practice in interpreting related copyright provisions of TRIPS.
Other international instruments. The objectives and principles set forth in Articles 7 and 8 are supported by a myriad of other international instruments that promote economic development, transfer of technology, social welfare (including nutritional and health needs), and so forth. Human rights instruments, such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, support a number of the same objectives and principles as Articles 7 and 8. The various agreements of the International Labour Organization, and the charter of the World Health Organization, sup- port the development-oriented objectives and principles of TRIPS. In the imple- mentation of TRIPS and in any dispute settlement proceedings it will be useful to establish the supportive links between the objectives and principles stated in Articles 7 and 8, and the objectives and principles of other international instru- ments. The Appellate Body, as noted in Chapter 1 (Section 4 on the ”Shrimp- Turtles” case), has moved firmly away from the notion of the WTO as a “self- contained” legal regime, and the establishment of support in other international instruments may help persuade the AB to recognize and give effect to develop- mental priorities.
