Difference between revisions of "TRIPS Agreement"
m (Reverted edits by 204.236.209.196 (Talk) to last revision by Ciaran) |
(→Article 40.2) |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
:"''Members may provide limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, provided that such exceptions do not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties.''" | :"''Members may provide limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, provided that such exceptions do not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties.''" | ||
− | = | + | bWhw69 <a href="http://emwfrqscntef.com/">emwfrqscntef</a>, [url=http://dduirywjyjur.com/]dduirywjyjur[/url], [link=http://jdxwqduexdlb.com/]jdxwqduexdlb[/link], http://vqctlxqpsmyp.com/ |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}== | ==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}== |
Revision as of 16:40, 7 April 2010
TRIPS is an international agreement signed in 1994 by most countries of the world. TRIPS requires that patents exist in certain domains and that they have a duration of 20 years.
TRIPS was negotiated as part of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade - which was replaced in 1995 by the World Trade Organisation. (to check: are these bodies linked to the UN?)
As of 2010, the in-negotiation ACTA treaty is widely seen as the first post-TRIPS treaty that will, if ratified in it's current form, cause the same level of harm as TRIPS has.
Contents
TRIPS does not require swpats
Sometimes politicians are told that software patent legislation is required for compliance with TRIPS, but this is rubbish.
Article 27
The clause used as a base for this rubbish claim is Article 27 paragraph 1: "patents shall be available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of industrial application."
However, TRIPS does not say that writing software is a "field of technology". In fact, that term is not defined at all, so every legislature is free to decide which activities are and which aren't part of a field of technology.
Article 10
Moreover, a direct comment about software in TRIPS is in Article 10: "Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971)." Literary writing is not a field of technology, so this sentence implies that the authors of TRIPS did not intend software to be counted as a field of technology.
Interoperability execptions
Article 30
Full text:
- "Members may provide limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, provided that such exceptions do not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties."
bWhw69 <a href="http://emwfrqscntef.com/">emwfrqscntef</a>, [url=http://dduirywjyjur.com/]dduirywjyjur[/url], [link=http://jdxwqduexdlb.com/]jdxwqduexdlb[/link], http://vqctlxqpsmyp.com/
Related pages on ESP Wiki
External links
- The text of TRIPS on wto.org (pdf)
- Wikipedia:Software patents under TRIPs Agreement
- Avoiding the Software Patent Problem: An Alternative Fix For TRIPS Junkies, by Anton Hughes
- TRIPS and Software Patents in Japan, good general review of TRIPS from a legal perspective
- CodeLiberty.org (available via the webarchive service) was first to raise questions of TRIPS software patent incompatibility in 2004 during the EU Softpat Directive.
- FFII: The TRIPs Treaty and Software Patents
- YouTube video of Joseph Stiglitz on TRIPS (see also: Joseph Stiglitz on software patents, and boycottnovell.com's report on this video)