نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه حقوق مالکیت فکری، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران

2 دانش‌آموختۀ کارشناسی ارشد حقوق مالکیت فکری، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران.

چکیده

روندهای جدید در سطح ملی و بین‌المللی حکایت از تحولی دارند که در زمینۀ ضمانت اجراهای حقوق مالکیت فکری در حال وقوع است. این تحول می‌تواند در وضعیت سلامت عمومی جوامع تأثیرگذار باشد. تدابیر مرزی و گمرکی در تضمین نقل و انتقال داروها و جلوگیری از جعل و قاچاق آنها نقش مهمی دارند، اما گسترش بی‌حدوحصر تدابیر ضمانت اجرایی، می‌تواند نقل و انتقال و دسترسی به داروها را با مشکلاتی روبه‌رو سازد. هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی آثار منفی تحول قواعد ضمانت اجرای حقوق مالکیت فکری در کاهش دسترسی به داروهاست. پیگیری روند تریپس پلاس از سوی برخی کشورها و شکل‌گیری موافقت‌نامۀ تجاری مبارزه با جعل و تقلب، می‌تواند دارای تأثیرات منفی در حوزۀ بهداشت عمومی باشد. حفظ تعادل با استفاده از مقررات تریپس، در زمینۀ اعمال ضمانت اجراها، در کنار سایر انعطاف‌های حقوق مالکیت فکری، می‌تواند راهبرد مؤثری برای بهبود دسترسی به داروها باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The right to public health in the light of development of intellectual property enforcement rules

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mostafa Bakhtiarvand 1
  • Shiva Jamali Nezhad 2

2 MSc., Faculty of Law, University of Qom, Qom, Iran

چکیده [English]

New trends at national and international levels indicate an ongoing development in the context of intellectual property enforcement. This development may affect public health of societies. Although border and customs measures play an important role in ensuring the movement of medicines and prevention of their counterfeiting and smuggle, their excessive expansion may make their movement and accessibility difficult. The paper aims at studying the negative implications of intellectual property enforcement development on reducing access to medicines. Pursuing TRIPS-plus trend by certain countries and conclusion of ACTA may have negative effects in the public health field. Making a balance in applying the enforcements as a new strategy, along with other intellectual property flexibilities may be a proper solution to improve access to medicines.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Intellectual property enforcement
  • customs measures
  • ACTA Agreement
  • TRIPS-plus trend
  • counterfeit

1. فارسی

الف) کتاب

  1. حبیبی مجنده، محمد (1394). حقوق مالکیت فکری و حقوق بشر؛ تعامل‌ها و تعارض‌ها، قم: انتشارات دانشگاه مفید.

 

ب) مقاله

2. صادقی، محسن (1388). «حمایت از اختراعات دارویی و چالش‌های حقوق بشری آن»، مجلۀ دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دورۀ 39، ش 3.

 

2. انگلیسی

A) Books

3. Abbott, Frederick, Sean Flynn, Carlos Correa, Jonathan Berger, Natasha Nyak (2014). Using Competition Law to Promote Access to Health Technologies: A guidebook for low- and middle-income countries, New York , UNDP.

4. Acquah, Daniel Opoku (2017). Intellectual Property, Developing Countries and the Law and Policy of the European Union: Towards Postcolonial Control of Development, Helsinki, IPR University Center.

5. Assembly and the Working Groups of IMPACT (2011). International Medical Products Anti-Counterfeiting Taskforce (IMPACT) The handbook, Facts,  Activities, Documents, Italy, Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA).

6. Blakeney, Michael (2010). Guidebook on Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, London, Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute.

7. Shashikant, Sangeeta (2010). Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement And Seizure Of Medicines, “WHO: Approach to "counterfeit" drugs may affect access to medicines”, Malaysia, Third World Network (TWN), Intellectual Property Rights series 13.

8. WCO (2016). Illicit Trade Report, Brussels.

9. World Intellectual Property Organization (2012). The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Case Book, Geneva, Wipo, 3rd Edition.

10. WTO, WHO, WIPO (2013). Promoting access to medical technologies and innovation: intersections between public health, intellectual property and trade, Geneva.

 

B) Articles

11. Avafia, Tenu (2013). “The Potential Impact of TRIPS Plus IP enforcement Provisions on Access to Medicines in Africa”. UNDP, Midrand, South Africa.

12. Cottier, Thomas (2017). Embedding Intellectual Property in International Law, in Current Alliances in International Intellectual Property Lawmaking: The Emergence and Impact of Mega-Regionals, edited by Roffe, Pedro, Seuba, Xavier, ICTSD.

13. Flynn, Sean, Bijan Madhani (2011). “ACTA and Access to Medicines”, American University Washington College of Law, No. 22.

14. Forman, Lisa (2017). The Inadequate Global Policy Response to Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights: Impact on Access to Medicines in Low- and Middle-Income Countries, 31 Md. J. Int'l L. 8 Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257382. accessed 27 February 2019..

15. Li, Xuan (2008). “WCO SECURE: Lessons Learnt From The Abortion Of The Trips-Plus-Plus IP Enforcement Initiative”, South Centre, No. 19.

16. Lopert, Looth, Gleeson, Deborah (2013). “The High Price of “Free” Trade: U.S. Trade Agreements and Access to Medicines”, available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257382. accessed 27 February 2019.

17. Maybarduk, Peter (2010). “ACTA and Public Health”, American University Washington College of Law, No. 9.

18. Mercurio, Bryan (2006). TRIPS-Plus Provisions in FTAs:Recent Trends, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=947767.

19. Oxfam (2011), “Eye on the Ball: Medicine regulation – not IP enforcement – can best deliver quality medicines”, Oxfam.

20. singh, Umang (2010). “Counterfeit, Medicines And Acta”, National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR) University.

21. Tully, Stephen R. (2016). “Free Trade Agreements With The United States: 8 Lessons For Prospective Parties From Australia’s Experience”, 5 Br. J. Am. Leg. Studies.

22. Xavier, Seuba, Joan Rovira, Sophie Bloeman (2010). “Welfare Implications of Intellectual Property Enforcement Measures”, American University Washington College of Law, No. 5.

 

C) Documents

23. “National Intellectual Property Systems, Innovation and Economic Development”, OECD, 2014.

24. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1383/2003, European Union, 2003.

25. “The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and its Impact on Access to Medicines”, Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF), 2012.

26. “European Union and a Member State _ Seizure of Generic Drugs in Transit”, WT/DS408, World Trade Organization, 2010.

27. “The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: Implications for Access to Medicines and Public Health”, WHO, UNITAID, 2014.

28. Provisional Standards Employed by Customs for Uniform Rights Enforcement (SECURE), world customs organization, 2008.

29. Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

30. REGULATION (EU) No 608/2013 of the Eeropean Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 concerning customs enforcement of intellectual property rights and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003.

31. The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), 2011.

32. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.

33. Constitution of WHO, 1946.

 

D) Cases

34. Merck & Co., Inc. V. Apotex Inc., 2013 FC 751. http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2013/2013fc751/2013fc751.html. Accessed 27 February 2019.

 

E) Websites

35. http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/intervention-by-india-seizure-of-generic-drug-consignments-at-ec-ports.pdf.

36. https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements.