TRIPS 협정의 의약품 특허와 공중보건논의에 관한 미국의 입장과 대응방안

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This article focuses on the issue of compulsory license of pharmaceutical patents. Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement allows WTO Member countries compulsory licenses of patented inventions in certain special cases such as extreme emergency. Several countries with severe HIV/AIDS problems, such as Thailand and South Africa attempted to use the compulsory licenses of pharmaceutical patents. The U.S. governments, aggressively lobbied by U.S. pharmaceutical firms, gave political pressure on the Thai and South African governments, insisting that those compulsory licenses were violating article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement, which prohibits Member countries from discriminating field of technologies in patenting inventions. However, human rights groups both in and out of the U.S. gave political pressure on the Clinton Administration, managing to win the victory over the U.S. pharmaceutical firms. After failing to limit the use of compulsory licenses of pharmaceutical patents by developing countries, the U.S. pharmaceutical industry has seemed to give up the TRIPS regime, but chose bilateral negotiation to achieve their goals. This article tries to give some suggestions how to deal with the expected U.S. trade pressures when Korea chose to determine compulsory licenses of pharmaceutical patents.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• I. 서론
• II. TRIPS 협정 의 강제실시규정과 미국의 대응
• 1. TRIPS 협정의 강제설시규정
• 2. 강제실시의 시도에 대한 미국의 대응
• III. WTO 에서의 공중보건선언 및 TRIPS 협정 개정안의 채택
• 1. 공중보건선언의 채택
• 2. TRIPS 협정 개정안의 채택
• IV. TRIPS 협정의 협상 당시 미국의 전략:과거로부터 의 교훈
• 1. TRIPS 협정의 협상 당시의 구조
• 2. 양자협상과 미국무역 관련법
• 3. 다자협상의 장으로서 GATT를 선택
• 4. 지적재산권문제를 우루과이라운드에서 채택
• 5. 소결
• V. 공중보건선언 및 TRIPS 협정 개정안의 의미: 미국의 전략 변화
• VI. 결론 : 대응방안
• 참고문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 "특허발명의 권리회복제도와 강제실시제도" 21 (21): 2005

2 "미국통상법과 대외정책분석" 법문사 1997

3 "강제실시권 제도 변화에 따른 정부의 실질적 대응방안" 21 (21): 2005

4 "Transitional Patent Protection in the Republic of Korea" 52-, 1987

5 "Traders in a Brave New World" 1995

6 "Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights" 1986-19921993

7 "Today there are only losers" 2006

8 "The TRIPS Agreement" 2003

9 "Taking TRIPS on the Information Superhighway" 41 (41): 1996

10 "TRIPS and Pharmaceutical Patents" 2003

11 "Strengthening Worldwide Protection of Intellectual Property Rights" 1987

12 "Regional and Bi-lateral Agreements and a TRIPS-Plus World" Quaker United Nations Office 2003

13 "Public Health and Intellectual Property Rights" 2 (2): 2002

14 "Private Power, Public Law" 2003

15 "Pharmaceutical Pricing and South African Health Policy" 29 (29): 1999

16 "Note, Public Participation in Trade Negotiations" 103 : 1995

17 "Medicine Held Hostage by Profits" 1999

18 "Medecins Sans Frontieres" 2000

19 "Look at Brazil" New York Times Magazine 2001

20 "Letter to Charlene Barshefsky regarding Review of US Trade Policy as it Relates to Access to Essential Drugs" 1999

21 "Intellectual Property as a Trade Issue" 28 : 137-, 1994

22 "Gore in Conflict of Health and Profit" The Washington Post 2000

23 "Global Protection of Intellectual Property"

24 "Foreign Protection of Intellectual Property Rights and the Effect on U" -2065, 198802

25 "Firms Fight South Africa to Keep Patents on AIDS Drugs" The New York Times 2001

26 "Executive Order 13155 of May 10" 65 (65): 30521-30523, 2000

27 "Economic Issues and political Participation" 18 : 971-, 1996

28 "Detractors Hound Gore over AIDS Drugs" 2003

29 "Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health" 14 (14): 2001

30 "Amsterdam Statement to WTO Members States on a Access to Medicine" 1999

31 "Amendment of the TRIPS Agreement Decision of 6 December 2005" 2005